The following excerpt is from "Transitions for the People: Theory and Practice of ‘Transition’ and ‘Resilience’ in the UK’s Transition Movement - Alex Haxeltine and Gill Seyfang - July 2009):
- "Transition initiatives are formed as alternative value spaces to mainstream socio-technical systems, and so their ability to act symbiotically for incremental improvements is limited."
Another weakness in the philosophy is that it is much easier to envisage how local resilience on matters such as food can be achieved in places which are already rural or semi-rural, than in large inner-city areas where land use (and values) are very different. These urban centres are already housing more than half the world's population (a proportion that is also increasing) and there is a danger that the transition movement fails to address their needs or what happens to their populations when the existing system of systems breaks down (under the movement's core scenario). There is a danger of the movement becoming a justification for an "I'm alright, Jack" approach to a future where the inequities between the economically powerful and weak of the current system are replaced by new inequities - those between the self-sufficient rural communities and the urban poor who are left in an even worse plight than at present.
In order to impact the mainstream, I support the following recommendation, which comes from the same report:
1) "Engage more with the regime."
"Wider networking efforts outside the niche could be formalised and invested in, to build bridges with actors in mainstream systems, eg bus companies, developers, supermarkets. These links would spread the Transition message, reach to a wider audience, and potentially enrol resources to support activities. If the assumption is that these actors and their regimes will lose power and eventually disappear, as oil prices rise and climate change forces deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, this [assumption] could be seen as politically naïve: capitalist systems are well-practised at adapting to crises (Trapese, 2008). Alternatively, it may be found that the value-clash between the niche socio-technical system and the regime precludes the mutual exchange of ideas, but a niche that intends to grow and influence wider systems cannot risk stagnating in a small group of like-minded activists; it must communicate effectively with wider audiences. Intermediaries may be an option for translating the Transition movement’s ideas into a more accessible format ... Only in a future that envisions a complete breakdown in global economic trade and governance patterns would a totally re-localized economy be the only option."